I have a new long-form piece out in @r0manticon today. The main thesis is that our skillful use of contemplation (theōria) depends in part on affirming the existence of the phenomena to which it learns to attend. In the case of theōria, those objects are what we call forms or essences, and the piece argues that as we grow ever more skeptical of the reality of form, theōria begins to fade, creating a self-reinforcing loop in perception: form recedes from view as a legitimate metaphysical posit, theōria fades, form recedes further from view. But the piece also has a different purpose; namely, to get you back in touch with the depth and legitimacy of your own aesthetic encounter with the world-as-world. In some circles—expanding circles, I would argue—we’ve taken to thinking that aesthetic perception is something to be undermined in favor of a “truer” reality behind it, one that leaves the senses behind. As I argue in the piece, I think this kind of critical undermining of perception is a mistaken move (or, at least, it’s only one possible move within a rich repertoire of techniques). My alternative account makes a somewhat unusual case: Instead of a picture where form lies behind or beyond sensual perception—where perception must be escaped or overcome to reach the truth of things—I argue that rehabilitating form actually requires securing the value of appearances. Form just is what comes to presence in appearance, and our skillful looking is what affords that presence to disclose itself in richer, more meaningful detail. Link below.